diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'release_23/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-01-31-UniversalIRIdea.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | release_23/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-01-31-UniversalIRIdea.txt | 39 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 39 deletions
diff --git a/release_23/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-01-31-UniversalIRIdea.txt b/release_23/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-01-31-UniversalIRIdea.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 111706a34477..000000000000 --- a/release_23/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-01-31-UniversalIRIdea.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,39 +0,0 @@ -Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:04:33 -0600 -From: Vikram S. Adve <vadve@cs.uiuc.edu> -To: Chris Lattner <lattner@cs.uiuc.edu> -Subject: another thought - -I have a budding idea about making LLVM a little more ambitious: a -customizable runtime system that can be used to implement language-specific -virtual machines for many different languages. E.g., a C vm, a C++ vm, a -Java vm, a Lisp vm, .. - -The idea would be that LLVM would provide a standard set of runtime features -(some low-level like standard assembly instructions with code generation and -static and runtime optimization; some higher-level like type-safety and -perhaps a garbage collection library). Each language vm would select the -runtime features needed for that language, extending or customizing them as -needed. Most of the machine-dependent code-generation and optimization -features as well as low-level machine-independent optimizations (like PRE) -could be provided by LLVM and should be sufficient for any language, -simplifying the language compiler. (This would also help interoperability -between languages.) Also, some or most of the higher-level -machine-independent features like type-safety and access safety should be -reusable by different languages, with minor extensions. The language -compiler could then focus on language-specific analyses and optimizations. - -The risk is that this sounds like a universal IR -- something that the -compiler community has tried and failed to develop for decades, and is -universally skeptical about. No matter what we say, we won't be able to -convince anyone that we have a universal IR that will work. We need to -think about whether LLVM is different or if has something novel that might -convince people. E.g., the idea of providing a package of separable -features that different languages select from. Also, using SSA with or -without type-safety as the intermediate representation. - -One interesting starting point would be to discuss how a JVM would be -implemented on top of LLVM a bit more. That might give us clues on how to -structure LLVM to support one or more language VMs. - ---Vikram - |